Protecting the Green Belt

ThamesNews.net has a report on the clear letter of support that Boris recently sent to Parish Councils in his constituency affected by the Government proposal to expand Oxford and build on Green Belt land. Boris is pursuing this matter within Westminster, calling for the protection of the Green Belt to be maintained and for an end to the delay in making a decision that is affecting so many.

Post navigation

12 thoughts on “Protecting the Green Belt”

The shattered water made a misty din.
Great waves looked over others coming in,
And thought of doing something to the shore
That water never did to land before.
…….
You could not tell, and yet it looked as if
The shore was lucky in being backed by cliff,
The cliff in being backed by continent;
It looked as if a night of dark intent
Was coming, and not only a night, an age.
Someone had better be prepared for rage.
(R.Frost)

People need houses. As long as we run an ‘open door & social housing for anyone’ policy, couples with the ‘incentivise natives to sit at home eating pizza & drinking economy lager rather than working’ policy, arguing about where the new arrivals will live is moot. They will come, they will live somewhere. Fix the broken pipe before you try to dry out the carpet.

As CPRE and Conservative party members, we are writing to Boris Johnson, our MP, to express our outrage at the appalling intention of this Government to remove all public input and accoutability from the RDAs. This is wholly undemocratic, and is yet another example of this Government moving towards a bureaucratic dictatorship. We are rapidly descending into an oligarchy.

this is for cycling forum:
“To you, they are clearly ostentatious symbols of wealth and arrogance, with 4×4s the worst offenders of all. The contemporary belief that they despoil the planet helps justify your feelings, but the contempt would be there with or without it, I suspect.”

I am enlightened with your comments, Tayle s, and agree fully. I would only appreciate more the symbols of wealth, such as electricity and central heating if they work when we are in need of them – such as you need electricity when you wake up 4 am to study !

Oxford is a world heritage and should be treated as such. Oxford may well sustain its relative advantages and may only follow development plan to continue what it is best at – that is educating the world. I heartily appreciate the erudite at oxford, graciously putting behind the age of ignorance and arrogance in dignity.

Traffic congestion and subsequent pollution damage to man and land is bringing loss to the measure that medieval atrocity could not overcome.

[re the £25 charge for large cars: Porsche have threatened to sue] The Conservative mayoral candidate, Boris Johnson, said he “understood where Porsche was coming from”.
This is Boris Johnson showing his weak personality: unable to commit one way or the other. Transport in London has benefitted over the last few years due to conviction, not spinelessness.

The Green Belt is all very well but urban infill cannot go on for ever with the population growing remorselessly. I’ve read that a 10% boundary expansion in villages and small towns would be enough to soak up the surplus. What’s wrong with that, on the understanding that population growth through you-know-what is strictly limited in future?

Great ideas for Boris:
Kit Malthouse had a fascinating article in The Times on Tuesday, urging us make greater use of the tunnels under London. A couple of the most appealing ideas in the piece were as follows:

We could, for instance, drop the dual carriageway that currently blights the north side of the Thames into a tunnel below, replacing it with a four-mile long riverside park from Blackfriars to Battersea Bridge. Bypassing Parliament Square at the same time would allow it to be pedestrianised on two sides.

Similarly a tunnel could take traffic from the Edgware Road under Hyde Park and the gardens of Buckingham Palace and allow it to emerge south of Victoria station, where most of it is heading in any event.

The entire Hyde Park Corner interchange could be dropped below ground, and the three great parks of Central London could be united. You could walk from Parliament Square to Queensway, about three miles, without crossing a road. Park Lane would be freed up for redevelopment, and a grand new public square could be created at Marble Arch.
Malthouse’s ideas sound good to me. As usual though, the ASI was there first. As we said in our 1994 publication 20-20 Vision:
There are many tunnels under London, and even Underground stations, obsolete for existing use. It should be one of our priorities to investigate how many of these tunnels could be restored and extended for use as urban tollways. They would offer motorists the opportunity to cross under London at various points, paying a toll to miss some of the surface congestion.
Source: adam smith blog

Surely we should be REDUCING Britains Population, what are People thinking, we have 60 Million here already, the Govt is taling about 100 Million !!!! What sort of country do we want for our children.

Think about this next time you are stuck in traffic or in an overcrowded city shopping center.

If we Reduced the Population we could solve the Housing shortage, reduce crime, rising prison Populations, co2 emmisions, nhs and welfare overstretch.
Land fill Problems, Our farmers would be able to feed us.

No wait, the Govt is ahead of me, 6 Million abortions, a bill to sterilise British schoolgirls ( imported races to be exempt ) and EU Phile Jack Straw says ‘ the British are not worth saving as a race’